21% increase: Court restrains FCCPC from taking administrative actions against Multichoice

In the wake of a suit by Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission’s (FCCPC) against MultiChoice Nigeria following its 21 per cent price hike, the Federal High Court in Abuja has asked the Consumer Protector to restrain from taking administrative steps against the DStv and GOtv parent company. 

Recall that FCCPC had earlier summoned MultiChoice to appear on February 27 for an investigative hearing on its scheduled subscription price adjustment and also to retain its existing subscription prices until it concludes its investigation.

In Wednesday’s court session, Justice James Omotosho issued the restraining order in an ex parte motion filed by MultiChoice’s lawyer, Moyosore J. Onibanjo (SAN), against the FCCPC, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/379/2025.

In its motion, the pay-TV company sought an order of interim injunction that halts the FCCPC from carrying out the threatened prosecution or taking any steps capable of disrupting the business activities of MultiChoice, pending the hearing and determination of the motion for an interlocutory injunction.

“An order of interim injunction restraining the FCCPC, its agents, servants, or privies from sanctioning or penalizing MultiChoice (the applicant) in any manner whatsoever in relation to its price increase pending the hearing and determination of the motion for an interlocutory injunction,” the suit added.   

On its grounds, Onibanjo noted that Nigeria operates a free-market economy where prices of goods and services are not regulated. On regulatory terms, he cited that the FCCPC Act and other laws do not provide the commission authority to regulate prices or require businesses to seek approval before adjusting the cost of their services.

He added that following MultiChoice’s declaration of its price increase intention and FCCPC’s directive to suspend its planned action, the pay-TV company filed a suit on March 3, 2025, challenging the FCCPC’s power to regulate prices or suspend its price adjustment and proceeded with the planned price increase. 

Onibajo explained to the court that despite the pending suit, the Consumer Protector threatened to prosecute MultiChoice via a letter dated March 3, 2025, if it failed to table concise reasons for disregarding the directive to suspend its planned price hike.

After hearing the MultiChoice lawyer’s oral application, Justice Omotosho directed the FCCPC to halt its action in taking any “administrative steps” against MultiChoice pending the determination of the case.

The presiding judge then adjourned the hearing to March 27, 2025. 

Similar Read: Price hike: Nigerian Consumer Protection Commission sues MultiChoice, CEO

Multichoice stance on price adjustment

Last month, Multichoice revealed its plan to increase subscription prices across various packages starting in March 2025 where the cost of the DStv Compact bouquet rose from N15,700 to N19,000, representing a 21 per cent increase. The adjustment comes nearly a year after the last price review.

The company attributes the price increase to Nigeria’s economic challenges such as naira depreciation, high energy costs, and inflation which stood at 24.48 per cent as of January 2025. 

It stressed that its action was borne from unbending economic pressures, ranging from inflation to operational costs. The hikes have, however, been a source of irritation for Nigerian subscribers, the majority of whom are pressed by the rising costs in other important aspects of daily living.

In another defence to the price increase, the company argued that its subscription rates in Nigeria are the lowest among all the countries where it operates. 

An affidavit deposed by Gozie Onumonu, Head of Regulatory Affairs and Government Relations at MultiChoice, noted that “the cost of the Premium package in Nigeria is equivalent to $29.81, while the same package costs $85.11 in Kenya.” This contrasts FCCPC’s notion that MultiChoice applies different pricing strategies in other markets, heightening questions about fairness and market abuse.

Meanwhile, the latest court ruling has further placed a question mark on FCCPC’s authority and power to protect consumers’ interests. The commission had stated that the recurring unilateral price adjustment raises critical questions on the ethics of fairness, market abuse, and potential anti-competitive practices.

“Exercising its mandate under Sections 32 and 33 of the FCCPA, the FCCPC directed the Chief Executive Officer of MultiChoice Nigeria to attend an investigative hearing at the commission’s headquarters on Thursday, February 27, 2025,” the commission states.

As the matter unfolds with the price hike in action, subsequent occurrences will be a big test for FCCPC on its commitment as a consumer watchdog in engaging relevant agencies to ensure fair competition and stronger consumer protection.